30. Intermediary Cities of Refuge: From Istanbul to Kolkata

The spaces of refuge are an intricate tapestry woven across the globe. As of 2016, there are 65.3 million people displaced worldwide which include 21.3 million refugees and further 10 million stateless people (UNHCR 2016). The question of transnational borders, justice and human rights are increasingly contested terrains that States must contend with in increasingly complex ways. What then constitutes spaces of refuge in the twenty-first century? What is its institutional basis and socio-political form? Camps, as a space of temporary to long term refuge, hosts many refugees such as Dadaab in Kenya, Zataari camp in Jordan or Mae La in Thailand. In this chapter, however we examine the urban as an intermediary space of refuge. The urban is often a place of convergence for displaced migrants due to the opportunity structures it provides. From Istanbul to Accra, Kolkata to Jordan, 60% of refugees are noted to reside in cities, the Global South often hosting the largest number of refugees. In this chapter, we conceptually and empirically explore two contrasting cities—Istanbul and Kolkata. In 2016, Turkey was noted as the largest host country of refugees under UNHCR’s mandate in the world. Turkey hosted 2.5 million Syrian refugees and over 250,000 refugees of other nationalities mostly living in cities. Similarly, India has historically hosted the largest number of refugees after partition. More recently as of June 2014, India was home to 198,665 refugees. The urban provides a habitat conducive for displaced populations: the infrastructure necessary for shelter and day to day living; informal economy allowing varying livelihoods; the anonymity of living in largely populated cities provides a safeguard against deportation; and the freedom to live outside a camp environment affords a certain kind of flexibility. Yet the challenges in a complex world of poverty, violence and insecurity make the struggle of survival a complicated process of daily negotiations. Using the examples of Istanbul and Kolkata we argue that such contradictions necessitate that we rethink cities of the twenty-first century through the lens of transnational justice and refuge.